Disinformation and Digital Literacy

It’s almost three years since
“fake news” became a major talking point and the problem seems more intractable
than ever. The major online platforms are awash with conspiracy theories,
disinformation, and extremist propaganda. The alarming implications are evident
across the world. Disinformation about vaccines is linked to a global rise in
preventable diseases. Ireland had a threefold increase in measles cases between
2017 and 2018 (Pollak 2019). Just as troublingly, there is a global spike in
far-right extremists pushing disinformation about minority groups (Newton
2018). Of course, such content always had a home online, but it was largely
confined to fringe spaces where most people were unlikely to see it.

A major part of the problem is
that social platforms amplify extreme content. This is an unintended
consequence of algorithms that are designed to maintain our attention. Writing
in The New York Times last year,
Zeynep Tufekci noted that YouTube’s recommendation algorithm “seems to have
concluded that people are drawn to content that is more extreme than what they
started with”. So when someone seeks out a video about the flu vaccine, the
recommendations will include anti-vaccination conspiracy theories.

The major social-media platforms
have made some moves to address this issue. Facebook and Twitter both promised
to reduce the prominence of anti-vaccine content. Political disinformation is
more challenging and controversial. In the wake of terror attacks by white
supremacists, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern convened a summit
during which five major tech companies pledged
to tackle extremist material. Unfortunately, we have seen such non-binding
pledges before. Last September, the same companies committed to an EU code of
practice for transparency in political advertising. However, the resulting
actions of this self-regulatory standard are so far uninspiring (Mozilla 2019).

While there is a growing case for
regulating the platforms, it must be acknowledged that content moderation is
technically challenging (Sakuma 2019). Moreover, the motivations behind the
promotion of extreme content extend far beyond technology to include issues of
politics, social inequality, and education. This calls for multiple,
overlapping countermeasures that are not confined to regulation.

The online practices of ordinary
citizens are a crucial and somewhat overlooked node in the problem. Afterall,
disinformation and extreme content only have an impact when ordinary citizens
are willing to believe it and promote it among their peers. This year, the
Digital News Report asked a series of questions about information quality and
how people react in response to concerns about accuracy. Some 61 per cent of
Irish online news consumers are concerned about about the reliability of online
information. Yet, there is a gap between those who expressed concern and those
who have taken action to address that concern.

To evaluate the reliability of a
news story, 42 per cent of respondents compared multiple sources. This is a
simple strategy, which is widely recommended by media literacy experts. On
social media, it is especially important to check sources because, as previous
Digital News Reports have shown, people often do not notice the source when a
news item appears in their feed. Consequently, it is relatively easy for people
to be duped by false articles that mimic the look of established news media or
by the re-sharing of old articles.

Some people have begun to pay
more attention to the reliability or reputation of sources: 22 per cent stopped
using certain news sources due to concerns about accuracy and 32 per cent have
become more reliant on sources that are considered reputable. Of course, what
is considered reputable is somewhat subjective, but these actions indicate an awareness
of basic media literacy principles.

Survey responses regarding the
role of peers are especially interesting. Social platforms rely on
information-sharing among peers, which creates a highly personal environment
for evaluating information. That is, we are more likely to trust information we
receive from peers and less likely to directly confront peers about the
information they share. To stop the spread of disinformation, these social
dynamics need to shift. It is promising to find that 26 per cent of Irish
respondents declined to share a news story because they doubted its accuracy
and 25 per cent ignored news when they were unsure about the trustworthiness of
the person who shared it.

Only a quarter of respondents are
currently taking such actions, but we can hope to see evidence of increased
media literacy in the coming years. Last March, Media Literacy Ireland launched
the Be Media Smart campaign to encourage people to check the reliability of
information. Such campaigns are an important part of promoting the skills and
competencies that are necessary to make informed decisions about media content.
The DCU FuJo Institute is leading a major research project (called Provenance)
to address this issue through automated content verification and a ‘verification
indicator’ for social media users. The goal of the project is to intervene in the attention
cycle of social media by encouraging people to think “is this legitimate?” or
“where is this coming from?” before they hit like, share, or retweet.

.@ColmLearns writes for FuJo on how sports media is using nostalgia to fill the hole left by the lack of live sport during the #COVID19 pandemic. Is it necessarily indulgent or can it help foster a critical view of the past and present?
fujomedia.eu/yesterdays-gam…

"It seems that the biggest social network in the world is, at least in part, basing its response to pandemic-related misinformation on a misreading of the academic literature." wired.com/story/why-is-f…

RT @jamesrbuk Left, tomorrow’s Guardian front page.
Right, tomorrow’s Mail front page.
They’re both write ups of the same study, and they’re both at least sort-of-accurate reflections of it.
No wonder the public is confused. pic.twitter.com/ccVbQ2zxAY